Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

The introduction of the second generation "atypical" antipsychotics has been heralded as a major advance in the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. Systematic reviews have revealed only modest advantages over conventional antipsychotics and uncertainty about long-term efficacy and safety, yet the second generation antipsychotic drugs have been widely accepted into clinical practice. Although the existing evidence of the benefits and harms of atypical antipsychotics can facilitate decision making about individual patients, the randomized evidence remains inadequate to make valid and fully evidence-based policy statements such as clinical practice guidelines that are designed to apply to groups of patients. Further large randomized trials are needed, but these require patients and clinicians to be in equipoise, or substantially uncertain, about alternative therapies. Premature clinical practice guidelines or expert opinion can lead to changes in clinical practice that make it difficult or impossible to conduct the required trials and are therefore a disservice to patients.


Journal article


Schizophr Bull

Publication Date





105 - 114


Antipsychotic Agents, Evidence-Based Medicine, Guidelines as Topic, Health Policy, Humans, Information Dissemination, Informed Consent, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Schizophrenia, United States